SHIVA ANAND Vs. INDIAN AIRLINES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner was an employee of the respondent No. 1 company and had been holding at the relevant time the post of Master Technician having EMP 423769. His initial appointment was in the post of Aircraft Technician, subsequently he was elevated to the above post. On or about October 28, the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet with the following charges:

(2.) Before issuance of the aforesaid charge-sheet the petitioner was placed under suspension in contemplation of the above disciplinary proceedings. However, order of suspension was revoked, subsequently on representation being made by the petitioner. Notwithstanding revocation of suspension order the disciplinary proceeding continued.

(3.) It appears on receipt of the aforesaid charge-sheet the petitioner raised the preliminary question as to maintainability of the aforesaid disciplinary proceedings, contending amongst others that the petitioner was not a factory worker so the standing order for factory workers is not applicable, as such the alleged misconduct as mentioned in the impugned charge-sheet being Clauses 28(11) and 28(20) are not applicable. The said standing order is applicable in case of the factory worker as such initiation of this disciplinary proceeding is bad in law. He also asked for a lawyer's assistance having regard to the complex nature of the charges of fraud and forgery.